Transcript Slide 1
JDAI in Nebraska-Expanding on Success NJJA Conference May 4, 2012 Corey Steel, Kim Thomas, Monica Miles-Steffens What is JDAI? • Created in 1992, by the Annie E. Casey Foundation (AECF), JDAI is a process designed to address the efficiency and effectiveness of juvenile detention across the United States. • JDAI is operational in over 150 jurisdictions and 30+ states, which includes over 75% of the country’s juvenile detained population • By the end of 2012, JDAI will be operational in 39 states and the District of Columbia JDAI Goals/Objectives (5) • Decrease the number of youth unnecessarily or inappropriately detained • Reduce FTA and re-offend rates prior to/pending adjudication • Redirect public funds towards effective juvenile justice processes and public safety strategies • Reduce disproportionate minority confinement and contact • Improve juvenile justice system overall 8 Core Strategies • • • • • • • • Collaboration Data Driven Decisions Objective Admissions Criteria Case Processing Alternatives to Detention Reduce Racial/Ethnic Disparities Conditions of Confinement Special Cases (VOP, placements, status) What’s Happening in Nebraska? Douglas County Efforts JDAI Honorable Vernon Daniels Thomas Warren JDAI Collaborative Crossover Youth Program Model Annie E. Casey Foundation Casey Family Programs Georgetown University Data TBD Conditions of Confinement Ray Curtis Tony Green Crossover Youth Implementation Team Honorable Doug Johnson Nicholas Juliano Disproportionate Minority Contact TBD Special Cases Mark LeFlore Objective Admissions Mike Cantrell Capt. Diana Kelly Alternatives to Detention Nick Juliano Karla Dush Case Processing Joy Suder CYPM will utilize existing JDAI subcommittees to the extent possible to avoid duplication and create efficiencies. Ad Hoc committees and working groups of CYPM may be necessary at various times in the process. Data The purpose of the Data Subcommittee is to oversee a collaborative effort to design and implement a plan for collecting baseline data on the detained population, and for collecting and monitoring data to measure the outcomes of the Initiative. • Reporting Elements created for regular monitoring of the initiative • Quarterly and Annual Reporting • Reconvene Common Definitions • Provide support and data for the broader collaborative – Identification of Target Populations – Identification of areas for improvement in data collection DMC The purpose of the DMC Subcommittee is to work within the JDAI framework to: 1) 2) 3) 4) identify stages in the juvenile justice system where minority youth are disproportionately represented; assess factors that contribute to DMC; develop intervention plans in conjunction with other JDAI Subcommittee and; monitor and track DMC trends overtime to identify emerging issues and measure progress. • Complete the Burns Institute Community Engagement Exercise • Identify priority DMC issues revealed in the DUS • Develop strategies to evaluate DMC progress • Identify Douglas County’s target populations • Review Relative Rate Index datacreate common definitions that are “in line” with all system stakeholders • Produce Reports in a timely manner regarding DMC issues OAS The purpose of the Objective Admissions Subcommittee is to review the current Risk Assessment Instrument for Nebraska, make recommendations on implementation, validation, and changes needed to ensure uniform application of the instrument to the juvenile population of Nebraska. The subcommittee will also review each discretion point where the outcome of the decision could result in the juvenile being detained and determine if an objective screening criteria is warranted. • Modification and approval of new statewide Risk Assessment Instrument for Intake Probation – Training by AECF – Approval via OAS sub through JDAI Collaborative to Statewide Committee • Create structured decision making grid for juvenile justice stakeholders for any point in the process • Collaborate with the Alternatives Subcommittee in the creation of objective screening instruments for alternatives to detention • Analysis of Probation data regarding alternative placement recommendations • Recommend "Continuum of The purpose of the alternatives" based on analysis Alternatives to • Capacity study of Detention current/existing alternatives Subcommittee is to assess the gaps between • Develop Alternative program needed and available screening instruments, in alternatives to detention cooperation with Objective in Douglas County, Admissions Subcommittee recommend strategies • Develop monthly reporting to fill the gaps, and criteria necessary to track oversee implementation success/failures of new or modified • HOME Program at Intake and detention alternatives. Staff Secure options ATD Case Processing The purpose of the subcommittee is to reduce unnecessary within the juvenile justice system. • Pre-Detention Hearing planning meetings • Case Flow Chart • Systems Map with timeframes • Case Processing Study CYPM Address the unique issues presented by children and youth who are known to both the child welfare and juvenile justice systems. These young people, often referred to as “crossover youth,” move between the child welfare and juvenile justice systems, or are known to both concurrently. • Identification of Target Population (in theory) Youth who have been arrested and have had an accepted Child Welfare intake within the last five years. • Determine prevalence of youth in target population • Creation of Implementation Team • Gap Analysis • Phase 1 Implementation Plan Major Findings From Detention Utilization Study • 85% Detention Rate (87% Juvenile Court) • 71% of detention admissions are Youth of Color, while comprising only 21% of the youth population • 66% of detention admissions are for “Other” offenses (i.e. violations of court orders). That number jumps to 78% when looking at Juvenile Court only. • Average Length of Stay in detention averages 30 days (range was 0 to 155 days) • Hispanic and Black males exceed the overall ALOS by at least 5 days • 67% of youth admitted to detention report a zip code East of 72nd Street. Successes • • • • • • • • • • • • DCYC makes additions to more accurately identify ‘admits’ Douglas County Board approves Resolution 411 naming the Collaborative and committing to participation in the AECF JDAI reform process (19 departments and agencies) Douglas County uses the AECF data tool that disaggregates our data and provides a “picture” of detention use and probation Douglas County visit JDAI Model Site to Portland, Oregon Regional effort with Sarpy County to use Staff Secure beds Purpose of Detention approved (February) HOME Program began accepting referrals at the point of intake (February) Douglas County Board approves renovation of Unit 11 for Staff Secure (February) Pilot project between Juvenile County Attorney and Juvenile Assessment Center to diverts youth from the system via ‘warning letter’ (February) Sarpy County launches as 2nd JDAI site in Nebraska (February) Statewide Coordinator Hired (March) Inter Site Conference-Houston (April 2012) Detention Admissions 2006-2011 Average Length of Stay 2006-2011 Average Daily Population 2006-2011 Admissions by Race 2006-2011 Next Steps in Douglas County • Risk Assessment Instrument training and revision • Expand continuum of alternatives available at the point of arrest • CYPM data extract that reflects that target population and data collection on target population What’s Happening in Nebraska? Statewide Expansion Steps to Statewide Effort • Sarpy County launched in spring of 2012. • Home for Statewide initiative confirmed in spring 2012. • Statewide coordinator hired in April 2012. • Statewide RAI training May 8th, 2012 • Development of Statewide Stakeholder Committee. • Support expansion of local sites.